If this...this thing had bothered to absorb the story, including how it came to be, she would have noted an onlooking cop in the photograph accompanying this article and the explanation in the first installment that, while the rally was indeed cancelled, it noted the authorities "will allow a brief oath ceremony."
In fairness, though, civil disobedience, along with its consequences, were anticipated and pledged had Oath Keepers been told "No," so this smug little hive insect managed to stumble across a truth, even if she's too ignorant to understand its significance.
Applying identical criteria, one can only conclude she would have overturned the Zenger jury, condemned Thoreau and hanged Parker. Applying identical criteria, we must assume she would have sided with the slave-catchers and demanded the prosecution of Underground Railroad abetters, believed cuffing Rosa Parks was justified, and approved of King having to write that letter from the Birmingham jail.
This is what they mean by "progressive."
Wait 'til she gets a load of what some of us are willing to do if those in power, emboldened by what they perceive to be a critical mass of useful idiots, keep pushing.
And I suspect that if she ever read what you've written here, all those references would have caused her already flaccid brain waves to flatten copletely.
ReplyDeleteHer typical response would be:
"What.Ever"
Say . . . it appears that sometimes she does admire civil disobedience.
ReplyDeleteNo hypocrisy there . . .
I asked her if she could explain the apparent inconsistency.
ReplyDeleteWhen people come at me with this "law is the law" thing, I sometimes ask them what they do for a living. Then I ask what they would think or do if, suddenly, that activity or product was declared "illegal."
ReplyDeleteI get mostly confused looks or they walk away.